There Are AMI Smart Meter Opt-out Programs; Why Not In All States?

Utility customers constantly contact me regarding AMI Smart Meters, especially when there are no opt-out provisions permitted either by their utility company or by the legislation enacted in their state, which Pennsylvania seems to think is what it did when, in fact, the state legislature passed an OPT-IN bill with the following language in HB2200 that became Act 129 (2008) and of public record:

(i) When a customer requests and agrees to pay the cost of the smart meter at the time of the request.

How many utility customers requested and paid $300 for an AMI Smart Meter upfront? None I’ve heard about or from. To the contrary, Pennsylvanians are refusing AMI Smart Meters in droves!

(ii) In new building construction

If you build a new home or other type of building, then an AMI Smart Meter has to be installed.

(iii) In accordance with a depreciation schedule not to exceed 15 years,

which means, not required until 2023—15 years after Act 129 went into effect!

So what happened in Pennsylvania that utility customers are harassed and emotionally abused about not wanting AMI Smart Meters in view of the above enacted legislation?

The problem is with the PA Public Utility Commission when it wrote the regulations for implementing Act 129 by flexing their administrative overreach! Did utility lobbyists play a role in that? That PA PUC overreach is confirmed in the March 22, 2017 letter Thomas McCarey received from Dave Hixson of the PA PUC Office of Communications stating:

As I [Hixson] stated in my earlier email correspondence with you, the Commission believes that it was the intent of the General Assembly to require all covered electric companies to deploy smart meters system-wide. [CJF emphasis]

Therein is the horrendous problem created for utility customers in Pennsylvania; it’s the PA PUC’s belief, not what the legislature discussed and enacted! But the AMI Smart Meter fiasco is not the only apparent administrative screw-up by the PA PUC.

Here’s a July 23, 2017 Philly.com (a Philadelphia Inquirer website) report of the PA PUC’s overreach giving Sunoco, your local gasoline supplier, eminent domain rights for a pipeline running through private citizens’ properties! You have to read “A fateful 2014 decision confounds foes of Sunoco’s Mariner East pipeline.” Shouldn’t someone in the state legislature be questioning if there are rogue decisions being made or special privileges granted by the PA PUC to certain corporations, e.g., electric utilities and Sunoco? Why is the PA legislature not exercising proper oversight?

Even Judge McCullough wrote in the July 3rd decision, “It is my renewed belief that Sunoco continues to take private property without lawful authority.” What’s going on with the PA PUC granting eminent domain rights to a gasoline supplier? Shouldn’t everyone be questioning the stupidity of the PA PUC administrative bureaucrats’ actions?

Another issue is the PA state legislature and/or the Attorney General’s office has not looked into nor investigated as to why, over the last several years, numerous OPT-OUT bills were introduced and the Chairman of the House Consumer Affairs Committee, Robert Godshall, had said he would never call those bills to the floor for a vote. Does Chairman Godshall’s son, Grey, being an Exelon/PECO employee, have anything to do with that, e.g., conflict(s) of interest(s)? Here was Grey’s LinkedIn page. Since Pennsylvanians began talking about Grey’s job, his LinkedIn page somehow went missing.

And Chairman Godshall has never called any of those opt-out bills; they all became sine die. Isn’t that denying Pennsylvanians their right to redress government from overbearing regulations imposed by the PA PUC, which are making people sick and fearful of living in their homes? Or those who are fearful for their family members—children, in particular, and persons who have serious health problems and/or diseases and cannot tolerate, nor should be exposed to, EMFs/RFs from AMI Smart Meters.

Compounding the above, the PA Consumers’ Advocate office in Harrisburg, the state capitol, tells those who want to file a complaint against the PA PUC and the utility, they will not take their complaint! Ever hear of such a thing? Is something going on in Pennsylvania that needs to be investigated either by an investigative journalist, who will report the facts and not “fake news,” or by the federal government?

Now here’s the clincher: The Energy Policy Act of 2005, §1252 Smart Metering DOES NOT make AMI Smart Meters mandatory! That would be unconstitutional! Furthermore, several states provide opt-outs from AMI Smart Meters, and here is the opt-out provision provided by PG&E in California. You will notice that to keep, or to set up, an analog meter (a safe meter used for decades with 5 dials and a rotating disk that does not emit RF radiation), it will cost $75 or less, plus there will be a $10 or less monthly fee. That seems reasonable, even though some may not like the additional charges.

However, what’s really going on in Pennsylvania is that citizens are not given similar options, as in other states, in order NOT to be exposed to EMFs and RF radiation. That truly seems counter to the Commonwealth’s Constitution, plus does not support personal health concerns regarding preventive healthcare and the precautionary principle. Or, is that what administrative governance has come to: corporate-run lackeys?

What’s wrong with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, its administrative agencies and the wimpy state legislature in mandating its citizens be exposed to a 2B carcinogen 24/7/365?

So why are numerous people concerned about “smart meters” [electric, natural gas and water]? Well, this video documents one woman’s health problems from a utility relay pointed toward her house emitting RFs.

Nonetheless, how would you like to be saddled with this, especially if you’re a senior citizen living on a fixed income?

There is a tricky rate fee one particular utility charges customers. The Glasgow Electric Plant Board’s “coincident peak rate” for electricity, which can charge up to $11 per kilowatt hour during that one hour each month when local demand for electricity was highest.

Oh! The games utility companies are allowed to play by regulatory agencies!

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.